Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1887-08-18

ke7mAar CGFF. Reae- lnfelk 54l1esy-l
Amls wns alsa n q Distriss CouF1
taaay thzf Involves 3 iaEas 81 g
mnnaY. Emma O. Derby Eicksz91n y
fhs p1min4nA mNninMt Asa II. HiahEEsrzs
T. n Nsekars1a and - King Oea1ty
xnNasfmnz1 C1mp1ny de1s1dAn1zs and
rs nneka 90 meemEB d G8oBse fran tne
0guH1. insurinR ~ oas half iBtsfsst ID
- nasa1s 81 Anog Il. NiekeFsoD, en4
m whfnh ths ether dsfundants bare
nome fntesent- 1ha pe1paR3y c1teo -
baIonefnR % ~ dsfsnda11 a1d which q
- ob5ss3 nG tha eont1n1leW, lies -
Psssos. King Lewis and ThnEston
ne pIssntfa ssss farsh that shs vss
marFiea 20 Azng II. NieksEscn % the
Iszh Of Ang1st. 1870 &c San FE1ncieco.
Thsg lived toRashaE &c MAJ and wife,
most Of the time IN Washington Terri
tsRy, until 1850. One child. girl. Wag
bern 20 them. Who Is n0w Is years 81
aea. In tie SIMMER 81 1850 her hls-
bard Indneod her 70 80 vita theiF child
70 Europs. Ehe vent and remained IN
I'D 1853, when she lsaxnad that her hus-
band, thro1gh perjury and
sUDonzAxz1a o. wExzzB
Secured 9 divorce frou The plainftH
throaqh tie Common Piees Ooars No.
q Philadelphia-shs having had No
nstsne Of the pEDosedinGs Whatsoever.
Two days aftex securing the divoEee be
(aecording 70 the eomplaintl went
Through the form Of maEriasa With one
Lena DiIler CartsF 81 Baltimore, and
lived With her e Philadelphla. Balti-
mora, Waahingto1, ID. O., and othal
phases and eQuandeEsd twenty thousand
dollars Of the propsrty In which The
piaintfa had Q community mistress.
lmmediateiy up0R hearing Of the salt
the plaintiff returned to Phlladelrbla
and Instituted proceedings 20 have The
decree Of divorce annuiied. and she
Court Sc aside and annnilsd the 0eeEee
on June 9Th. Immediately foll0vinR
this Judgement -NickerB0n ned, going
cot 81 the country, and has not siDee
returned 70 the United etates. slnoa
Nay, 1852, the plaintiff declares she his
NOS received any money from him
whatsoever. In March, 1851, the eu-
pssme Court Of the District Of Columbia
granted divorce 70 Der, and gave hoz
the custody Of The child. She alleged
that she has spent 5000 10 the
NAMB A8&uEAE
And child and IN carrying on The court
proceedings mentioned.
The property cited a. belonging d
the defendants and IN which she claims
G oue-half Interest, Il 90 follows: That
In Pierce eoanty IL lots /, 2, 3, 4, 10. IA
Is, Is, II, 10, 10, 20, =, 50. 81, 81. 80. o.
IS and IS Of the plat reeorded By the
Puget Sound Homestead Association In
the southwest quarter Of the northeast
quarter Of section So, township n, north
/ Of range east; also 10 II and n to "a
and 81 10 20 Of the northeast quarter Of
the south vest quarter Of section q
township n, north Of range 2 east.
In Lewis county Il b the n w ol
section Il, and the W J Of the N z y
Of section Il, and the N E u Of section
Is, In township Is, north Of range
vest, and containing $50 acres.
In Thurston county IL 10 the n Z cor,
neF Of the 8 E u Of the SW Of SEQ
ton -, township 10, north Of range
vest, running thence vest ID chains
south 8 chains, east 10 chains, and north
20 chains 10 the place Of beginning, and
containing - acres.
In King county it is She 8 Z corner Of
the 8 w Y Of She n E Of section I
township a, north Of range 8 east, run
ming thence west 20 chains, north l.
chains. east 20 and south II 10 place o.
beginning, and containing "a acres.
The plaintiff asks decree establish
ing the sum Of 5000 as q lien ant
charge also 10 the 3 z y Of the 8 W \
Of section q, township IS, north o
range vest In Thurston county. con
tanning 10 acres, which last % pFopeTt,
owned By the defendent previous 10 Ii
marriage 10 plaintiff, all the other haV
ing been accumulated after the mar
Eiaae, and which is therefore oommuni
| " property.